







xs 

X '-&g$ /\ 

4* flmfltoL* *tr 




* %fc 4 » 



«*<fc 





*bV* 






^6* 3 







**\.i^.V rf»*.555^..% y.-^i:/^ / 



•"oV* 



\ ^- y h % -^y .. v» ,/ <\ * 



.«, 



5^ 



'*.. • 




•' 4^ 



' % A* •■ 



* <* 










;•.♦♦ 



T»* ,<V 







**** 



aV ^ 




- *v. 



TO THE 



$ 



Si 



PEOPLE OF VIRGINIA! 



J 




" T1IU 


r 




^ 




J. 


j 1 


J. 



J.JL JU J. 



AND HIS ANTECEDENTS. 



READ AND CIRCULATE. 



RICHMOND: 

PR1NT!&> AT TIIE WHIO BOOH AND JOE OFFICE. 
1869. 









' I 3 ! 



t 



^4_-- 245/0^ 



'■' 



~0 






TO THE PEOPLE OF VIRGINIA. 



In the town of Lexington, in the year 1847, the following 
question was discussed before the Franklin Society: 

" Should'the people of Western Virginia delay any longer in 
taking steps to bring about a division of the State.' 1 '' 

The Franklin Society met every Saturday night — the debate 
was protracted from the 30th of January to the 24th of April. 
On this question John Letcher made three speeches, on the nega- 
tive side — maintaining that the people of Western Virginia 
should not delay any longer in taking steps to bring about a 

DIVISION OF THE STATE. 

Mr. Letcher's first speech was made before Dr. Ru finer ad- 
dressed the Society on the subject. Mr. Letcher and Dr. Ru fi- 
ner advocated the same side of the question. Both urged im- 
mediate action to b?*ing about a division of Virginia, and assailed 
the institution of slavery as an evil which the West would get rid 
of by separating from the East. 

The argument of Mr. Ruffner was considered by Mr. Letcher 
and others so "able" and "unanswerable" and so great was 
Mr. Letcher's anxiety to circulate such an argument through 
the country, that he and ten others solicited its publication by 
the following letter: 

" Lexington, Va., Sept. 1, 1847. 

"Dear Sir, — The undersigned, believing that the argument 
recently delivered by you in the Franklin Society, in favor of 
the removal of the negro population from Western Virginia, was 
not only able, but unanswerable, and that its publication will 
tend to bring the public mind to a correct conclusion on that 
momentous question, request that you will furnish us with a 
full statement of that argument for the press. 

" We cannot expect that you will now be able to furnish us 
a 2 



with the speech precisely as it was delivered, nor is it our wish 
that you shall confine yourself strictly to the views then ex- 
pressed. Our desire is to have the whole argument in favor of 
the proposition presented to the public, in a perspicuous and con- 
densed form. And, believing tbat your views were not only 
forcible but conclusive, and that they were presented in the 
shape which cannot give just cause of offence to even those 
who are most fastidious and excitable on all subjects having 
any connexion with the subject of slavery, we trust that you 
will be disposed cheerfully to comply with our request above 
expressed. 

Very respectfully, 

Your obedient servants, 

S. McD. Moore, 
JOHN LETCHER, 
David P. Curry, 
James A. Hamilton, 
Geo. A. Baker, 
J. H. Lacy, 
John Echols, 
James R. Jordan, 
Jacob Fuller, Jr., 
I). E. Moore, 
John W. Fuller. 

The Rev. Henry Ruffner, D. U." 

To which Dr. Ruffner gave the following reply: 

"Lexington, Va., Sept. 4, 1847. 

"To Messrs. Moore, Letcher, &c. 

11 Gentlemen, — Though long opposed in feeling to the perpetu- 
ation of slavery, yet, like others, I felt no call to immediate action 
to promote its removal, until the close of the important debate in 
the Franklin Society, to which your letter alludes. The argu- 
ments delivered by several of yourselves, and the results of my 
own examination of facts, so impressed my mind with the impor- 
tance of the subject to the welfare of the country, that I pro- 
ceeded immediately to write out an argument in favor of a gradual 
removal of slavery from my native soil, our dear West Virginia; 
and intended in some way to present it to the consideration of 
my fellow-citizens. Some months ago, you privately signified a 
desire that it might be printed, and have now formally made the 
request. 

" I cheerfully comply, so far as this, in the first instance, that 
I will prepare for the press an Address to the Citizens of West 
Virginia, comprising the substance of the argument as delivered 



by me, enriched and strengthened by some of the impressive 
views exhibited by several of yourselves. Within the limits of 
a moderately sized pamphlet, it is impossible to introduce every 
important consideration bearing on the subject, or to do more 
than present the substance of the prominent facts and reasons 
which were more fully exhibited and illustrated by. the debaters 
in the Society. 

a As we are nearly all slaveholders, and none of us approve of 
the principles and measures of the sect of abolitionists, we think 
that no man can be offended with us for offering to the people an 
argument, whose sole object is to show that the prosperity of our 
West Virginia — if not of East Virginia also — would be promoted 
by removing gradually the institution of slavery, in a manner 
consistent with the rights and interests of slaveholders. 

a To the Great Being who rules the destinies of our country, 
I commit the issue of this important movement. 

Yours, 

HENRY RUFFNER." 

Under these circumstances the RufTner address was published 
and the most monstrous libel upon the institution of slavery in- 
dustriously circulated for the perusal of slaveholders. 

It will be seen from the above correspondence, that Dr. RufT- 
ner was informed by Mr. Letcher, and others, that it was not 
expected that he would furnish the speech precisely as it was 
delivered — nor did they desire that he should confine himself 
strictly to the views therein expressed. But, on the contrary, he 
was requested to furnish the whole argument in favor of at once 
taking steps to bring about a division of the Commonwealth of 
Virginia, chiefly, if not only because of their violent opposition 
to slavery. 

To this request Dr. RufTner replied, as will be seen by refe- 
rence to his letter, that he would prepare the address, comprising 
the substance of the argument, as delivered by him, " enriched 
and stre?igthe?ied by some of the impressive views exhibited by 
several'" of the members of the Society, of wham John Letcher 
ivas one. 

Thus this Address embodied the views and wishes of John 
Letcher. To it he subscribed at the time, and its circulation 
iixts extended under the sanction of his name. 

Since the mention of Mr. Letcher's name as a Candidate for 



6 

Governor, he presents himself to the public by the following 
letter: 

" Lexington, Va. ; June 25th, 185S. 

" To the Editor of the South: 

"The Richmond Whiff of the 2lst inst. contains an article 
on the Gubernatorial Election, in which reference is made to Dr. 
Ruffner's Address on the subject of Slavery, and the connection 
of myself and others with its publication. I have no complaint 
to make of the Editor for his reference, as my acts and opinions 
are proper subjects of criticism ; nor do I seek to evade any just 
responsibility for either. 

"At the time of the publication of that Address, I state 
frankly, that I did regard Slavery as a social and political evil. 
I did not regard it then, or since, as a moral evil, for I was at 
that time, have been ever since, and am now the owner of slave 
property, by purchase and not by inheritance. I think I can 
hazard nothing in saying that, at that day, such an opinion was 
held by a large number of the citizens of Virginia, on both 
sides of the Blue Ridge. Since that time, much more attention 
has been given to the question; it has been much more tho- 
roughly examined in all its bearings, and is much better under- 
stood, not only in Virginia, but throughout the entire South. 
All must admit, that, within the last ten years, the question has 
been discussed with an ability never before expended upon it, 
and an impression thus made upon the public mind that has re- 
sulted in an almost entire revolution of public sentiment. Pre- 
vious to 1847, I had given very little consideration to it; subse- 
quently, however, I did examine it, and became entirely sat- 
isfied, not only that my opinion, as to the social and political 
influence of the institution, was erroneous, but I acknowledged 
my error. 

" When I became a candidate for a seat in the Reform Con- 
vention, the subject having been alluded to in the progress of 
the canvass, I avowed, in my speech to the people of Augusta, 
that I had changed my opinion; and stated that if my fidelity to 
the institution was distrusted by any man, it was his duty to 
oppose my election to the position I sought at the hands of the 
people. I was elected, and my course in the Convention, and 
for the past seven sessions in Congress, on all matters connected 
with slavery, will attest the sincerity of my convictions. The 
Journals of both bodies are accessible, and to them I refer for 
my votes. 

"The Whig of the 23d inst. contains a much longer article 
on the same subject, which embodies the letter addressed to Dr. 
Ruffner and sundry extracts from the address. The speech de- 
livered in the Franklin Society was a calm argument on the 



social and political influence of Slavery upon the agricultural 
and mechanical developement of Western Virginia. The pub- 
lished address contained many things so exceptionable that those 
(with one exception, I believe,) who called upon him to publish 
the speech, refused to contribute to the cost of the publication of 
the pamphlet. These facts are well known here. 

"In conclusion, I have only to add, that those who distrust 
my fidelity to my native State and her institutions, are bound 
by every consideration of duty to themselves, and the commu- 
nity in which we live, to oppose my elevation to any political 
position I may aspire to. 

J. LETCHER." 

To this letter Dr. Ruffner replied in the following: 

"To the People of "Virginia: 

"Fellow- Citizens, — The Honorable John Letcher has lately 
come before you with a letter concerning my address on Slavery, 
published in 1847, at the request of himself and ten other gen- 
tlemen of Lexington, Va. In this letter he charges me with 
having committed a fraud on him and his ten associates, in the 
publication of. that Address. The allegation vaguely intimates 
that I foisted in exceptionable things. This is a serious charge, 
and to me entirely new; for never before, during the ten years 
and nine months since the Address was published, did I hear of 
any such charge having been made by any one, either publicly 
or privately. 

" Since great ignorance and misconception seem to exist re- 
specting the origin and history of that Address, I will give a 
plain statement of facts. As few persons have copies of the 
pamphlet, I shall have to say something also of its contents. 

" In the spring or summer of 1 847, I was informed that a de- 
bate on slavery had arisen in the Franklin Society of Lexington, 
Va., and I was requested to attend, as the debate was expected 
to be long and interesting. This Society embraced most of the 
professional and literary gentlemen of the town, besides other 
intelligent citizens; and met weekly to debate questions. I was 
an honorary member, but did not regularly attend the meetings. 
This debate on slavery was continued from week to week for a 
•considerable time. 

"When I attended, I found the question to be, not whether 
slavery was right or wrong, but whether or not it was injurious 
to the public prosperity. Mr. Letcher and others took the anti- 
slavery side, whilst some able debaters, such as Mr. (now Judge) 
Brockenbrough and Col. Smith of the Virginia Military Insti- 
tute were on the pro-slavery side. 

" No one, so far as I remember, took the abolitionist ground, 



s 

that slaveholding is a sin, and ought, for that reason, to be abol- 
ished. With us it was merely a question of expediency, and 
was argued with special reference to the interests of West 
Virginia. 

" I joined the anti-slavery side, and, after a while, having col- 
lected some statistical facts, I made the speech which led to the 
publication of the Address. 1 was soon afterwards requested by 
some of our party to prepare my argument for publication, as it 
was thought by them to be unanswerable, and, 1 was told, had 
converted several members of the Society. I hesitated at first, 
and either refused or postponed compliance with the request, 
not wishing to appear before the public as a partisan on this 
question whilst I occupied the Presidential chair of Washington 
College, though I knew that my broken health would compel 
me to an early resignation. 

" But as the debate proceeded, we all became so heated under 
the hammer of argument, pro and con, that we were ready for 
an attempt to carry our views into effect. I commenced writing 
out the whole argument on our side; and when, about the time 
the debate closed, and we had a decided majority of votes in the 
Society, I was again spoken to, I consented to prepare for pub- 
lication, not my speech merely, but, whatever else might contri- 
bute to the success of our scheme for the gradual removal of 
slavery from Western Virginia. 

" But I required two conditions: 1st, that those who desired 
the publication of the argument should present their request in 
writing, in terms conformable to the plan of publication which I 
suggested; and, 2d, that all should contribute to the cost of 
printing. I was willing to come out, not as an individual, but 
only as the organ of a respectable party; and such I thought we 
were, though at the outset few in number. The anti-slavery 
feeling had been prevalent in West Virginia, and seemed to need 
only such an impulse as we could give it ; to recover its former 
strength. 

Mr. Letcher and ten other gentlemen readily complied with 
my conditions, and addressed me the letter which was printed 
in the foreground of the pamphlet. In this letter the eleven 
gentlemen said expressly that they did not expect me to furnish- 
my .speech just as it was delivered, nor did they wish me to 
" confine myself strictly to the views then expressed." On the 
contrary ; they desired to have ' the whole argument in favor of 
the proposition presented to the public in a perspicuous and con- 
densed form." Thus, they left it discretionary with me to add 
to the matter of my speech whatever I thought proper, to give 



9 

completeness and force to the argument l in favor of removing 
the negro population from Western Virginia,' as they expressed 
it. The whole contents of the pamphlet were written conforma- 
bly to the desire expressed in this letter. 

"My colleagues added, in their letter, that the views expressed 
in my speech were ' in a shape which could not give just cause 
of offence to even those who were most fastidious and excitable 
on the subject of slavery.' This could mean only that my 
views were not of the abolitionist shape. The address presented 
the same views as the speech, and in the same argumentative 
shape. I maintained the moral right of slaveholding, and as- 
sailed the abolitionists as a morally insane, malignant, meddle- 
some and mischievous sect, with whom we woulu have nothing 
to do. Hut I argued strenuously, as we all did in the Society, 
that slavery, in its effects upon the country, was a ' pernicious 
institution,' &c. 

" When the Address was circulated by mail and otherwise 
through West Virginia, we soon perceived that most of the 
editors and politicians of the Valley would not embark with us 
in an enterprise of doubtful success. They objected to our 
movement as ill-timed, while Northern abolitionism was raging. 
Without their concurrence we must fail. West of the Alle- 
ghany the pamphlet was better received; but in East Virginia 
some papers denounced it as abolitionist. 

11 It is true, as Mr. Letcher says, that my colleagues did not 
contribute to the cost of the publication. When the printer's 
bill came in, and I privately spoke to one or two of them about 
it, I found that for some reason there was a disinclination to con- 
tribute. Therefore I paid the printer's bill myself. As several 
of them aided me in the distribution of the pamphlet, and I 
never heard till now the charge of fraud in the publication, 
which I know to be false, I imagined any reason but that, and 
made no encmiry on the subject. None of our party ever, to my 
knowledge, objected to the contents of the Address. Now, as 
Mr. Letcher's charge is vague, I call upon him to specify what 
'exceptionable things 1 I foisted into the Address. My sole ob- 
ject is self-defence. I accuse no one. Let him specify; then, 
having a definite issue, I will try conclusions with him. 

HENRY RUFFNER." 

Kanawha Salines, July 15, 1S58. 

Mr. Letcher not having replied to this, Dr. Ru finer subse- 
cmently made the following statement: 
" Fellow-Citizens of Virginia: 

"Since my statement of facts concerning my pamphlet on 
slavery was printed, I have received a letter and copies of some 



10 

printed articles on the subject from Lexington, Va., where the 
pamphlet originated. 

"In the ' Valley Star,' the Democratic paper of that place, 
an article under the editorial head says, in reference to the Rich- 
mond Enquirer's construction of Mr. Letcher's letter : ' Dr. 
Ru finer is too well known in this community to have any impu- 
tation of fraud or forgery put upon him by any of our citizens. 
That Mr. Letcher intended no such imputation, ive have the 
very best means of knowing.'' 

" Now, although Mr. Letcher's letter was construed by others 
as well as by myself, in the sense of a dishonorable imputation 
on my conduct in that publication, yet, since he publicly disa- 
vows any such imputation, I cheerfully accept the disavowal. 
So far as that point is concerned, all ground of controversy be- 
tween us is removed." 

"I wish the article in the Valley Star had been equally satis- 
factory in the following paragraph. The writer says: 'There 
was nothing extremely wonderful in a material variance between 
a speech delivered in February and an essay printed in the follow- 
ing September, the speech not having been written out before 
delivery; and if Dr. Ru finer had been inclined to find fault with 
those who discovered and asserted the variance, Ave presume he 
would have done it at the time Mr. Letcher and other gentlemen 
declined on that ground to subscribe to the expenses of the pam- 
phlet. ' 

''This paragraph modifies considerably the assertion in Mr. 
Letcher's letter, that my pamphlet contained 'so many exception- 
able things' not in the speech I was requested to publish, that 
he and the ten other gentlemen 'with perhaps one exception, 
refused to contribute to the cost.' Still the paragraph (uninten- 
tionally, I presume,) misrepresents the facts of the case. It erro- 
neously assumes that I was requested to publish the speech 
merely; that I was informed by Mr. Letcher and others, that they 
declined to subscribe to the expense on the ground of 'material 
variance' between the pamphlet and the speech, and that I applied 
to them to 'subscribe,' after the pamphlet was published, &e. 

"But in fact they requested me to present to the public, not 
simply the speech, but ' the whole argument' in favor of remo- 
ving the negro population from West Virginia — and they sub- 
scribed .a written obligation to share the expense, before I con- 
sented to publish. This paper was left with one of the signers, 
(not Mr. Letcher,) and when, some time after the pamphlet was 
published, I inquired for it, this gentleman told me that another 
had gotten it out of his hands. I requested that it might be 
found, as the printer had called for the amount of his bill (nearly 
§100). I waited a short time for the paper, and hearing nothing 



It 

of it, I paid the bill myself; and, suspecting that for some reasons 
unknown to me, a portion of the subscribers were unwilling to 
pay, I said nothing and heard nothing more of the matter. I 
have now received authentic information, that several of the 
subscribers called on the printer to pay their quotas, but were 
told that I had paid the bill, and was unwilling to receive assist- 
ance. This report may have prevented others from offering to 
pay. Who or how many besides Mr. Letcher declined to pay, 
because the pamphlet varied from the speech, I know not. But 
this I know, that the' pamphlet went forth with their letter request- 
ing the publication on its front, and that not one of them ever, 
publicly or to me, objected to its contents, or withdrew from it 
the sanction of his name, until Mr. Letcher's letter was published, 
some weeks ago. 

"That the pamphlet, written under excitement produced by a 
long debate, contains some epithets and phrases concerning 
slavery rather harsh and coarse I readily admit. I saw after the 
pamphlet came out, that they were in bad taste. I was not 
surprised to see that the enemies of our scheme selected these, 
some five or six in number, as specimens of the whole pamphlet 
of forty octavo pages, and used them as texts for their vituperation 
of the whole work. This was easier than to answer the argu- 
ments, which Mr. Letcher and the other ten gentlemen pro- 
nounced to be unanswerable, and which none of the doughty 
assailants of the pamphlet ever attempted to answer, or dared so 
much as to quote for the information of their readers. Instead 
of grappling with Samson, they walked round him, and slyly 
picking some motes out of his coat tail, held these up triumph- 
antly, as evidence that he was a shabby fellow. 

"From the articles in the Lexington papers, I discover that I 
committed two immaterial errors in my former statement. Not 
having access to the records of the Franklin Society, I mistook 
in supposing that my speech on slavery was delivered in the 
spring or summer of 1S47. I learn now that it was in February 
of that year. I find also that the main question concerned a 
division of the State by the line of the Blue Ridge, and involved 
all the relations of West Virginia to the Eastern section. A con- 
test was then going on between the two sections, concerning 
'the white basis' of representation, internal improvements, &c, 
though ttoe slavery question was the main topic of debate, and 
banished the rest from my memory. But now I am reminded 
how I came to introduce my argument on slavery with a series 
of remarks on the injuries which West Virginia suffered on ac- 
count of her weakness in the Legislature, and to argue that 'the 
white basis' and the slavery question should be connected in 
our discussions with East Virginia. I only spoke the expressed 



12 

sentiments of those who requested the publication of my pam- 
phlet. 

" But now if my statements are suffered to pass uncontradicted, 
I shall not trouble the public with another word on the subject. 
I esteem Mr. Letcher as a gentleman and an able politician, and 
freely exonerate him from any intention to wrong me, since he 
has disavowed the imputation which he was understood to lay 
upon me. 

HENRY RUFFNER." 

• 

The preceding communications explain themselves, and it is 
scarcely necessary to comment upon them. They contain a 
plain and full explanation of the origin of the Ru finer Address. 
They show Mr. Letcher's hearty and active sympathy with the 
views it contains. They defy Mr. Letcher to point out in what 
respect the address published is materially different from that 
delivered. 

With this explanation and defiance before the public since 
July last, Mr. Letcher has remained silent. Why? The people 
must judge for themselves! 

Thus, upon every principle of impartial deduction and fair 
reasoning, Mr. Letcher stands deliberately committed to every 
word of this address, as it was published. 

Of the views presented in this address, Mr. Letcher does not 
protend, as his own letter shows, that he ever made any recanta- 
tion, except when lie was a candidate for the Reform Convention. 
In his letter, he says, he stated to the people of the county of 
Augusta, when he was a candidate for their suffrages, that he had 
changed his opinion. It will be observed that his letter was 
written only to explain his position upon the subject of slavery. 
According to that letter, he was the pledged advocate of the 
views and objects of Dr. Ruffner's Address, so far as he had 
ever expressed himself upon the subject, until he was a candidate 
for the votes of the people of Augusta. Then, when he was a 
candidate for their votes, he says he told the people of Augusta 
he had changed his opinion. 

At that time, Mr. Letcher was a candidate for the Reform 
Convention — at that time, the county of Augusta contained more 
than five thousand slaves, as the census will show. To the 
owner's of these slaves, when he was a candidate for the Reform 
Co?iccntion, he said he had changed his opinion. It will be 



remembered that the confessed object of the Ruffner Address 
was to separate Eastern Virginia from Western Virginia, and 
that Western Virginia was to be a free, anti-slavery , independent 
State. In the details of this plan, the " Bine Ridge" was to be 
the dividing line. And it will be further remembered that the 
County of Augusta is one of the Eastern Counties of the West 
side of the " Blue Ridge. ' ' To the people of this County, which 
was at that time inhabited by upwards of jive thousand slaves, 
he stated, when he was a candidate for their votes that he had 
changed his opinion. 

Now, the County of Augusta was not the only County before 
whose people he was a candidate for the Reform Convention. 
His letter, written in June last, was to explain his position on 
the slavery question. He does not pretend, in that letter, that 
he declared to any other people, or to the people of any other 
County, that he had changed his opinions. So that, according 
to his own statement, he declared only to the people of one 
County (and that lying next to the Blue Ridge,) any change of 
opinion upon the subject at all. Nor did he express any change 
of opinion at all, until he "was a candidate," and then not 
until his connection with the Ruffner Address ivas charged against 
him . 

Thus Mr. Letcher's identification with the Ruffner Address — 
its origin, end and object, is conclusively established. 

Mr. Letcher was elected a member of the Convention, and 
made one speech upon the subject of slavery. Now, he has said 
in his letter, that he told the people of Augusta, when he was a 
candidate for the Reform Convention, that he had changed his 
opinion — and also that while he had been of opinion that slavery 
was a "social and political evil," he had never considered it a 
moral evil. To show what were his opinions after he was a 
candidate for the Reform Convention, and after he was elected, 
look into his record in the Convention. The following is an 
extract from his speech, delivered in the Convention when he 
was a member of that body. It is taken from the files of the 
Richmond Enquirer, of November 29th, 1858, of which more 
will be said hereafter: 

" Mr. Letcher's friends (says the Enquirer,) urge, in excuse 
for him, that unauthorised interpolations were made by Dr. 



14 

Ruffner. This is emphatically denied by the reverend Doctor, 
and in that issue of veracity we do not propose to take either 
side — certainly not against a man of so eminent piety and virtue 
as Dr. Ruffner. 

"In 1S50, when a member of the Reform Convention, Mr. 
Letcher said : 

" The fact is, that gentlemen of the East, in viewing these 
matters, have but one idea in their heads, and that is negro- 
ology. [Laughter.] They never can see beyond it; and to 
their peculiar notions respecting its perpetuation, everything else 
must be made to conform. * # They have more boarders at 
the public house of entertainment, in this city, kept by Colonel 
Charles S. Morgan, and known as the Penitentiary, than we 
have. [Laughter.] Let us look at the Penitentiary statistics, 
and I am sorry to say to my friend from Accomac, that his 
portion of the State is exceedingly well represented in this 
useful public institution. I can only account for it, from the 
fact that Norfolk is in his neighborhood. 

" Mr. Wise. — It is always our habit to send our rogues 
abroad, and not keep them amongst us. [Laughter.] 

u Mr. Letcher. But you take very good care to send them 
where they will be supported at the public expense. [Laughter.] 
You send them here to the public boarding-house, where we 
have to contribute our share of the money necessary to keep up 
the establishment. I commend this item to the consideration of 
gentlemen who talk about paying all the taxes, and getting none 
of the benefits. Tide- water is fully represented there. She 
has sent forty-one white persons and fifty one negroes. By the 
way, while upon the last subject, let me remark, that in free 
negroes, (that admirable class of population, so great an acquisi- 
tion to any community, and one that ought to be retained among 
us,) you of the East beat us all hollow. [Laughter.] And it 
must be remembered, that upon this population, or rather upon 
the taxes levied upon them, you propose, in part, at least, to 
base representation. From Piedmont you have sent twenty-four 
whites and fourteen negroes. And now, how is it on the West- 
ern side of the Blue Ridge, with our majority of 93,000 white 
people? From the Valley we have sent sixteen white and three 
colored convicts; and from the trans- Alleghany forty whites and 
no colored convicts. So that the result, as figured up, shows 
that Eastern Virginia has, in that State hotel, one hundred and 
thirty boarders, and Western Virginia but fifty-nine. Now, I 
imagine that gentlemen would have claimed moral superiority 
over us also, had they been aware of these facts. [Laughter.] 
But in putting their claims on other grounds, they seem to 
.have forgotten to refer to these important statistics, which de- 



15 

monstrate so clearly the moral superiority of Eastern over West- 
ern Virginia. I should like to know whether these boarders, in 
the Penitentiary, are counted as part of the population here, 
and permitted, in the basis of representation, to weigh against 
the honest men of the West? How is it? Perhaps some gen- 
tleman from Richmond can give us the information. What says 
my friend over the way ? 

"Mr. Scott, of Richmond. — I do not think they constitute 
a part of the population of Richmond or any other part of the 
East. 

"Mr. Letcher. — You think not? 

"Mr. Scott, of Richmond. — I think not. But I would re- 
mind my friend from Rockbridge, that many of the boarders in 
the Penitentiary, sent from this city, are those who have come 
among us from other sections. 

" Mr. Letcher. — I know how it is in my county. A great 
many rogues come there from Eastern Virginia, and are sent 
from there here. [Laughter.] I think I may say that not more 
than one native-born citizen of Rockbridge has been sent to the 
Penitentiary from that county, for the last five or six years." 

" What argument in favor of the white basis (asks the Enqui- 
rer) can be derived from such gratuitous invectives against the 
Eastern section of the State? 

"As Greensville county has given Mr. Letcher a vote of con- 
fidence, it may not be inappropriate to quote his opinion of that 
county, as expressed in the Reform Convention: 

" There is another point to which I wish to refer. The dis- 
tinguished gentleman from Greensville (Mr. Chambliss) tells 
us, that he represents twenty-five thousand negroes on this 
floor, and I trust he will pardon me if I call his attention to some 
of the distinguishing evidences of superiority which mark his 
district. The district is composed of the counties of Greens- 
ville, Southampton, Nansemond, Isle of Wight, Sussex and 
Surry, and they have a population of 23,000 white people, 
26,^91 slaves, and pay a tax of $18,579. They have also a 
large number of free negroes, 7,093, almost as many as there are 
in all Western Virginia. They have of those who cannot read 
and write 3,685, out of a population of 23,000. There are 
2,507 slave owners in that district, and they own these 26,291 
negroes. Well, how is it in other respects? Why, some of 
these comities are travelling the down hill road, if we may judge 
from the assessment of their lands. The county of Greensville 
has fallen since 1820 very considerably in the assessment of the 
value of her lands. From something like $6.13 the acre, they 
have fallen now to $2.82 an acre ; and so it is in sundry other 
counties in the same district which I might mention. How is 



16 

it in the West, that neglected portion of the State ? Our lands 
have been advancing in price, our taxable property has been in- 
creasing, and the amounts we pay into the treasury have been 
augmenting annually." 

Let it be borne in mind that Mr. Letcher, in his letter, has 
said that while he did believe slavery to be a " social and poli- 
tical" evil, he never did consider it to be a moral evil; and let it 
be further borne in mind, that he says in that letter he stated to 
the people of Augusta, when he was a candidate, and only to 
them, that he had changed his views — and then let the reader 
ask himself the question, if Mr. Letcher did not speak inaccu- 
rately, if not uncandidly? For it will be seen at once, from the 
above extract from his speech in the Convention, that he not 
only believed sla\-ery to be morally ivrong, but that such were 
the violence of his feelings and the force of his convictions, he 
could not express them, except by taunting the East in the 
following language: " The fact is that gentlemen of the East 
have but one idea in their heads, and that is negro-ology ." And 
further, so convinced was Mr. Letcher of the immoral influences 
of slavery, that he could not express his opinion, except by 
resorting to the desperate illustration of proving, by statistics, 
that the Eastern — the slaveholding portion of Virginia — sent 
more people to the Penitentiary than the West — thus, from his 
own lips, not only contending that slavery was morally ivrong, 
but that it was a corrupting and depraved institution, and that 
its effects, where it most prevailed, were to make Penitentiary 
convicts. 

If this be a change of opinion, God save us from the opinions, 
with all their variations, of John Letcher! 

And now let it be seen how far facts sustain this presentation 
of Mr. Letcher's record upon the institution of slavery! His 
connection with the " Ru finer Address" has been shown. It 
is proper nowto inquire what is the "Ruffner Address." This 
Address is now being extensively circulated throughout the 
State — and can be read by as many as choose to read it; but for 
those who may not see, or be disposed to read it entire, the fol- 
lowing extracts are submitted, to show that it is a premeditated, 
well-studied attack upon the institution of slavery, morally, 
socially and politically. The following is a sample of the 



17 

nature and character of this most pernicious and detestable 
document. 

In speaking of the emancipation of slaves in Virginia, it says: 

" Whatever may be thought of such a measure in reference to 
East Virginia, where the slaves are more numerous than the 
whites, there can be no rational doubt that in West Virginia the 
measure, had it been carried fifteen years ago, would by this 
time have wrought a most happy change in the condition and 
prospects of the country. 

# # * % it w" e (j not censure our Eastern brethren for oppo- 
sing this measure so far as their part of the State is concerned. 
But still, we of West Virginia' must deem ourselves not only 
unfortunate, but aggrieved, when an Eastern majority in the 
Legislature debars us from obtaining measures conducive to our 
welfare, because these same measures may not suit the policy of 
East Virginia. 

# # # * "Though defeated for the time, the friends of gra- 
dual emancipation were not in despair. There was a general 
acknowledgment of the evils of slavery, and strong hopes were 
entertained, that, in a few years, a decided majority of the Legis- 
lature would be for ridding the country of this deleterious insti- 
tution. But these hopes were sadly disappointed. East Virginia 
became more and more adverse, not only to emancipation in any 
mode or form, but to any discussion of the subject. Even in 
our West Virginia, though we be believe no material change of 
sentiment has taken place, little has since been said, and nothing 
done, to effect an object so important to the welfare of the 
country." 

In speaking of the interference of Northern abolitionists, and 
arguing that their fanaticism had helped to defeat the emanci- 
pation of slaves, it says: 

"But, fellow citizens, shall we suffer this meddlesome sect of 
abolitionists to blind 1 our eyes to the evils of slavery, and to tie 
up our hands, when the condition of the country and the welfare 
of ourselves and our children summon us to immediate action." 

The author of this address enters into an abuse of Northern 
abolitionists chiefly because their fanaticism, had caused slave- 
holders to adhere more closely to their slaves and had thus thrown 
in the way an impediment to slavery emancipation, and then, in 
speaking of Northern abolitionists on the one side and Southern 
politicians and ultra pro- slavery men on the other, says: 

# m b b "Against the one party we affirm the right of slave- 
holding, under present circumstances; against the other party, 

B 



18 

we affirm the expediency of removing slavery from West Vir 
ginia, and from every other State or portion of a State, in which 
the number of slaves is not too large." 

# # # # a^H that we ask of our Eastern brethren, in regard 
to this matter, is, that if West Virginia shall call for a law id re- 
move slavery from her side of the Blue Ridge, East Virginia 
shall not refuse her consent, because the measure may not be 
palatable to herself. 

# # ## <<if East Virginia apprehend that the delegates from 
the free counties would often speak more freely about slavery 
matters than she would like to hear in her central city of Rich- 
mond, let her agree to remove the seat of Government to Staun- 
ton, near the centre of our territory and of our white population, 
and she will be free from all annoyance of this sort. 

# # # # "Having thus removed some grounds of misappre- 
hension and prejudice respecting our views, we shall now pro- 
ceed, fellow-citizens, to lay before you some facts and arguments, 
which prove the expediency of abolishing slavery in West Vir- 
ginia, by a gradual process, that shall not cause any incon- 
venience either to society in general, or to slaveholders in 
particular." 

After entering into a comparison of the free and the slave 
States, for the purpose of showing the advantages which the 
free States have over the slave States, it reads: 

"But this general comparison between the two classes of 
States, does not truly measure the effect of slavery in checking 
the growth and prosperity of States; because, in the first place, 
it takes in the new, thinly peopled slave States, where slave labor, 
operating on new soils of the best quality, has not had time to 
do its work of impoverishment and desolation; and because, in 
the second place, it takes in some States, both old and new, in 
which the slaves are comparatively few, and a predominance of 
free labor counteracts the destructive tendencies of slavery. 
Such are the old State of Maryland and the new State of Mis- 
souri; besides others — as Kentucky and Tennessee — in which 
slavery, though deeply injurious, is itself held in check by a free 
laboring population." 

Ih speaking of the decline of Virginia, it reads : 

" What has done this work of desolation? Not war, nor pes- 
tilence; not oppression of rulers, civil or ecclesiastical — but 
slavery, A CURSE MORE DESTRUCTIVE IN ITS EF- 
FECTS THAN ANY OF THEM." 

# # # * ^ It is in the last period of ten years, from 1830 to 



19 

1840, that THIS CONSUMING PLAGUE OF SLAVERY 

has shown its worst effects in the old Southern States. 

# # # # "Old Virginia was the first State to sow this land of 
ours with slavery; she is also the first to reap the full harvest 
of destruction. Her lowland neighbors of Maryland and the 
Carolinas were not far behind at the* seeding; nor are they far 

-behind at the gathering of desolation. Most sorry are we for 
this fallen condition of 'The Old Dominion,' and of her neigh- 
bors; but such being the fact, we state it as an argument and a 
warning to our West Virginia. It demonstrates the ruinous ef- 
fects of slavery upon the countries in which the longest and most 
complete trial has been made. 

# # # # "There are certain drugs, of which large doses are 
poisonous, but small ones are innocent or even salutary. 
Slavery is not of this kind. Large doses of it kill, it is true; 
but smaller doses, mix them as you will, are sure to sicke?i and 
debilitate the body politic. 

In speaking of Missouri, it says: 

"Missouri is too new a country to afford instruction on this 
subject; but her physical advantages are drawing such a multi- 
tude of free emigrants into her, that her small amount of slavery 
must, ere long, give way and vanish before 'the genius of uni- 
versal emancipation " 

In speaking of Maryland, it says: 

"Maryland has comparatively few slaves, and these are found 
chiefly about her old tide-water shores, where, like the locusts, 
they have eaten up nearly every green thing." 

In speaking of Virginia, it says: 

"Our own West Virginia furnishes conclusive evidence that 
slavery, in all quantities and degrees, has a pernicious influence 
on the public welfare." 

Again, of Virginia it says: 

" Her black children have sucked her so dry, that now, for a 
long time past, she has not milk enough for her offspring, either 
black or white." 

In speaking of the emigration from Virginia, it says: 

" The true cause of this unexampled emigration is, that no 
branch of industry flourishes, or can flourish among us, so long 
as slavery is established by law, and the labor of the country is 
done chiefly by men, who can gain nothing by assiduity, by 
skill, or by economy." 
b 2 



20 

*•* * * "You will observe also, how every class of facts 
that bear at all upon tbe subject, lead uniformly to the same 
conclusion; how every line of inquiry always points to slavery 
as the original cause of inferior prosperity or of positive decline." 

In speaking of the evil influences of slavery on manufac- 
tures, it says: 

" This can be attributed only to slavery, which paralyzes our 
energies, disperses our population, and keeps us few and poor, 
in spite of the bountiful gifts of nature, with which a benign 
Providence has endowed our country." 

In speaking, again, of the emigration from Virginia, it says: 

" This remarkable fact, that they will quit their country, 
rather than their ruinous system of 'agriculture, proves that their 
institution of slavery disqualifies them to pursue any occupa- 
tion, except this same runious system of agriculture." 

Of commerce and navigation, it says: 

"In fact the commerce of ow old slave-eaten Commonwealth 
has decayed and dwindled away to a mere pittance in the gene- 
ral mass of American trade." 

# # # * u \Ye do not blame our Southern people for abstain- 
ing from all employments of this kind. What could they do? 
Set their negroes to building ships? Who ever imagined such 
an absurdity? But could they not hire white men to do such 
things? No: for in the first place, Southern white men have 
no skill in such matters; and in the second place, Northern 
workmen cannot be hired in the South, without receiving a 
heavy premium for working in a slave State." 

The hurtful effects of Slavery upon common schools and 
popular education are thus portrayed. After giving elaborate 
statistics upon this subject, it says: 

"We give these only as approximations to the truth, but they 
are sufficiently near to show, beyond any manner of doubt, that 
slavery exerts a most pernicious influence on the cause of edu- 
cation. This it does by keeping the white population thinly 
scattered and poor, and making the poorer part of them generally 
indifferent about the education of their children." 

* m # # <<A similar difference between the free States and 
slave States appears in the West, when Ave compare Ohio with 
Kentucky and Tennessee. Four times as large a proportion of 
children attend school in Ohio, as in the other two States; while 
the proportion of illiterates is only one-fourth as great. On the 
whole, the evidence on this subject is complete and unquestion- 



21 

able. The people in the slave States are not, and cannot be, half 
as well accommodated with schools, as in the free States; and 
slavery inflicts on multitudes of them the curse of ignorance and 
■menial degradation through life.' 1 '' 

m m # * u Having thus briefly, yet we believe sufficiently, es- 
tablished the proposition that slavery is pernicious to the welfare 
of States, we shall conclude the argument by establishing the 
particular proposition, that slavery is pernicious to the welfare of 
West Virginia. This being contained in the general proposi- 
tion does not need any separate proof; yet, lest some people 
should imagine that West Virginia is an exception, and has not 
suffered from slavery, we shall demonstrate to you the contrary 
by plain facts — facts derived from actual experience — the very 
best evidence which the nature of the case admits of. We com- 
pare the past progress and present condition of West Virginia, 
with the past progress and present condition of the countries 
adjacent to her." 

In speaking of the Valley of Virginia, it says: 

"What a pity that so rich and so lovely a land SHOULD 
BE AFFLICTED WITH THIS YELLO W FEVEli AND 
THIS BLACK VOMIT. 

m # * m "Lands in West Virginia are much cheaper than 
similar lands in the free country North of Virginia. Yet, rather 
than buy and cultivate these good cheap Virginia lands, North- 
ern farmers go farther, pay more, and fare worse; so they do, 
and so they will. They look upon all Virginia as an infected 
country— AND SO IT IS. 

I • • * « VVe glory in Wheeling, because she, only, in Vir- 
ginia deserves to be called a manufacturing town. For this her 
citizens deserve to be crowned — not with laurel — but with the 
solid gold of prosperity. But, how came it that Wheeling, and 
next to her, Wellsburg — of all the towns in Virginia, s-hould be- 
come manufacturing towns ? Answer : They breathe the 
atmosphere of free States, almost touching them on both 
sides. But again : Seeing that Wheeling, as a seat for manu- 
factures, is equal to Pittsburg, and inferior to no town in Ame- 
rica, except Richmond; and that, moreover, she has almost no 
slaves — why is Wheeling so far behind Pittsburg, and compara- 
tively so slow in her growth? Answer: She is in a country in 
which slavery is established by law. 

"Thus it appears, fellow-citizens, by infallible proofs, that 
West Virginia, in all her parts and all her interests, has suffered 
immensely from the institution of slavery. 

"The bad policy of the Legislature in former times, in respect 
to roads and land surveys west of the Alleghany, did great in- 



jurf to the country. But, after allowance is made for this, a vast 
balance of injury is chargeable to slavery, and to nothing else. 
In those parts west of the Alleghany, upon the Ohio and its 
navigable waters, where want of roads and disputed land titles 
did least injury — there, too, the corrosive touch of slavery has 
also shown its cankerous effects. 

To illustrate the injurious influence of slavery, it says: 

u Comparatively few slaves in a country,- especially one like 
ours, may do it immense injury. 

, m # # & u Sl avcr y naturally tends to increase from small be- 
ginnings, until the slaves outnumber the whites and the country 
IS RUINED. 

# # # m u yy^g p r i ce of cotton will probably decline more and 
more, and consequently the value of slaves; then also the law of 
slave increase, by which it gains on the white population, will 
operate in West Virginia with ruinous effect, unless prevented by 
law. 

m m m a Q a st it off, west Virginians, whilst yet you have the 
power; for if you let it descend unbroken to your children, it will 
have grown to A MOUNTAIN OF MISERY UPON THEIR 
HEADS. 

"In plain terms, fellow-citizens, Eastern slaveholders will 
come with their multitudes of slaves to settle upon the fresh 
lands of West Virginia. Eastern slaves will be sent by thou- 
sands for a market in West Virginia. Every valley will echo 
with the cry 'Negroes! Negroes for sale! Dog cheap! Dog 
cheap! " And because they are dog cheap, many of our people 
will buy them. We have shown how slavery has prepared the 
people for this: how a little slavery makes way for more, and 
how the law of slave increase operates to fill up every part of 
the country to the same level with slaves. 

"And then, fellow-citizens, when you have suffered your 
country to be filled with negro slaves instead of white freemen; 
when its population shall be as motley as Joseph's coat of many 
colors — as ring-streaked and speckled as father Jacob's flock was 
in Padan Aram — Avhat will the white basis of representation 
avail you, if you obtain it? Whether you obtain it or not, East 
Virginia will have triumphed; or rather slavery will have tri- 
umphed, AND ALL VIRGINIA WILL HAVE BECOME A 
LAND OF DARKNESS AND OF THE SHADOW OF 
DEATH. 

"■ Then, by a forbearance which has no merit, and a supineness 
which has no excuse, you will have given to your children, for 
their inheritance, this lovely land blackened with a negro popu- 
late. — the offscourings of Eastern Virginia — the fog end of 



23 

slavery— the loathsome dregs of that CUP OF ABOMINATION, 
which has already sickened to death the Eastern half of our 
Commonwealth. 

" Delay not then, we beseech yon, to raise a barrier against 
this Stygian inundation — to stand at the Bine Ridge, and with 
sovereign energy, say to this Black Sea of misery, "Hitherto 
shalt thou come and no farther." 

" To show that the extinction of slavery among us is practicable 
without injustice or injury to any man, we present you the fol- 
lowing outlines of a scheme for the removal of slavery: 

"Let the farther importation of slaves into West Virginia be 
prohibited by law. 

"The expediency of this measure is obvious. 

"Let the exportation of slaves be freely permitted, as here- 
tofore; but with this restriction , that children of slaves born after 
a certain day shall not be exported at all after they are fve 
years old, nor those under that age, unless the slaves of the same 
negro family be exported with them. 

"Let the existing generation of slaves remain in their present 
condition, but let their offspring, bom after a certain day, be 
emancipated at an age not exceeding twenty-five years. 

"Let masters be required to have the heirs of emancipation 
taught reading, writing and arithmetic; and let churches and 
benevolent people attend to their religious instruction. Thus an 
improved class of free negroes would be raised up. No objection 
could be made to their literary education, after emancipation was 
decreed. 

"Finally, in order to hasten the extinction of slavery, where 
the people desire it, in counties containing few slaves, the law 
might authorize the people of any county by some very large 
majority, or by consent of a majority of the slaveholders to decree 
the removal or emancipation of all the slaves of the county, 
within a certain term of years, seven, ten or fifteen, according 
to the number of the slaves. 

"Now, fellow-citizens, it is for you to determine whether the 
slavery question shall be considered, discussed and decided, at 
this critical turning point of your country's history — or whether 
it shall lie dormant until the doom of West Virginia is sealed. 
May Heaven direct your minds to the course dictated by pa- 
triotism, by humanity and by your own true interest. 

A Slave Holder of West Virginia." 

Nor is this all ! To show, still further, that Mr. Letcher was 
altogether hostile to slavery, after his alleged change of opinion, 
and that whenever he gave a vote it embodied an expression of 



24 

his prejudices against slaveholders and slavery, the attention of 
the reader is called to the fact: 

1st, That when Mr. Letcher was called upon to vote in the 
Reform Convention upon the subjects of taxation and the tax 
which should be assessed upon slaves, he voted that slaves 
under twelve years of age should be taxed — and, 

2d, That whenever a slave was condemned to be hung or 
sentenced to transportation, the owner of said slave should not be 
paid for his loss. 

These votes, as indeed his whole career, show that every thing 
Mr. Letcher did or said manifest his extreme prejudices against 
the institution of slavery, and his antagonism and injustice to 
slave-owners. 

Such is Mr. Letcher's record, and such are the objections to 
his past course and conduct, that the Editors of the leading De- 
mocratic journal of the State, the Richmond Enquirer, could 
not refrain from an earnest and able specification of his nu- 
merous disqualifications to be the Governor of Virginia. 

The following extracts from the columns of that journal are 
a fair sample of his many past follies and transgressions. The 
limits of this pamphlet will, of course, prevent the insertion 
of the editorials at large, but in order to test the accuracy of 
these extracts, the dates of the paper in which they respectively 
appear are given. 

On November the 5th, 1S5S, the Richmond Enquirer, in 
speaking of John Letcher's relation to the Know Nothing party, 
said: 

"Nor do we charge that Mr. Letcher ever joined the organi- 
zation, but we say that Mr. Letcher and the partisans who were 
desirous of nominating him as a tertium quid, at the Staunton 
Convention, did make Governor Wise's uncompromising oppo- 
sition to the Know Nothing party a chief ground of objection to 
his nomination. He was heard to express an uncertainty as to 
whether he would support the choice of the Convention." 

In the issue of November the 11th, the Richmond Enquirer 
said: 

"We have altogether failed to discover an instance in which 
Mr. Letcher has lent a prompt, entire and unhesitating support 
to any single public measure proposed for the constitutional pro- 
tection of the institution of slavery." 



25 

Again, in the issue of November the 24th, the Richmond 
Enquirer said: 

'"An Armed Neutral.' — The communication in our issue 
of to-day, over the above signature, puts a question to us, which 
we do not hesitate to answer. 

" Mr. Letcher was desirous to oust Mr. Hunter from the Senate 
in 1852, and Governor Wise was Mr. Letcher's first choice for 
the seat in the Senate. Our correspondent further asks whether 
Mr. Letcher wrote to Gov. Wise, urging him to oppose Mr. 
Hunter. This question we decline to answer. Let our corres- 
pondent apply directly to Mr. Letcher, himself, to answer this 
question. 

"One thing is certain, Mr. Letcher cannot go into the discus- 
sion of this matter, without convicting himself of wilful deceit. 
It is well known how bitterly Mr. Letcher opposed the nomi- 
nation of Gov. Wise, in 1854, and that Mr. Letcher manifested 
a willingness to defeat his election even after the nomination was 
made. Even his unwilling declarations of adhesion to the Demo- 
cratic ticket, opposed as they were, by contradictory acts and 
declarations, are sufficient to convict him. 

" On Wednesday last, Mr. Roger A . Pryor related to a meeting 
of the Richmond Democracy a conversation had with Mr. Letcher 
shortly after the nomination at Staunton. Mr. Letcher said that 
Mr. Wise was a 'bitter pill for him to swallow;' that he had 
warmly opposed Wise in 1840, while, he, Letcher was editor of 
a newspaper, and hence found it difficult to give him a warm 
support; nevertheless, he was willing to acquiesce in the nomi- 
nation for the sake of the party. 

"If Mr. Letcher made the declarations attributed to him by 
Mr. Pryor, he was guilty, we repeat it, as we have repeated it 
viva voce before the Democracy of Richmond, of hypocrisy and 
falsehood. 

" The pretence that the man who was his chosen favorite in 
1851-'52, for the place of United States Senator from Virginia 
was, as candidate for Governor, a 'bitter pill' in 1854-'55, 
merely because of events as far back as 1840, constitutes nothing 
less than voluntary untruth. 

" We also deny the assertion that Mr. Letcher was willing to 
acquiesce in the nomination for the sake of the party. He was 
finally forced into an unwilling and churlish acquiescence, merely 
for the sake of retaining his own seat in Congress, and in spite 
of his well known inclinations towards Know Nothingism. 

" Is this 'Honest John Letcher?' Has honesty itself become 
a lucus a non lucendo ? ' ' 



26 

On the 25th ; it said: 

"When Mr. Newton says 'we have arrived at that period in 
our history which was so clearly foreseen, and so deeply de- 
plored, by the great political philosophers of the South,' 'shall 
we place at the head of public affairs the only man, among his 
competitors in Virginia, who denied the philosophy of the 
'great political philosophers of the South,' and pronounced the 
great subject of their theories as 'a social and political evil' — a 
'black vomit' and 'yellow fever?' " 

Again, on the 26th, it says: 

"John Letcher is the anti-internal improvement candidate for 
the Democratic nomination. This is the whole secret of the 
otherwise unaccountable efforts now made in his favor." 

Again, on the 29th, it says: 

"In 1847, Mr. Letcher solicited 'a calm and conclusive' ar- 
gument against slavery, the very document his friend and sup- 
porter, the Editor of 'The South,' pronounced, in all the charity 
of special friendship, 'a piece of folly for which we can 

SCARCELY VENTURE AN APOLOGY MUCH LESS A JUSTIFICATION,' 

and, in regard to which same document, 'The South' 'as- 
sured the 'Whig' of our detestation for the sentiments 
of Dr. Ruffner's address.' 'The South' further charged — 
that the address ' is evidently an atrocious libel on the 
social system of the South, as well as a most unphiloso- 
phical and inaccurate representation of the political 
and economical influences of slavery." 

Again, on the 30th, it says: 

"John Letcher's Know Nothing Speech — His First No- 
mination for Governor of Virginia. — We beg that some of 
Mr. Letcher's friends will go to the Petersburg Convention well 
prepared with the particulars of the following resume of unde- 
niable facts. 

"In 1854, Mr. Letcher made a speech assailing the Adminis- 
tration of Franklin Pierce for the nomination of Pierre Soule as 
Minister to Spain. The language and bearing of this discourse 
was such, that a prominent Democrat of the Tenth Legion de- 
nounced it, openly, as a 'Know Nothing speech.' Shortly af- 
terwards, the Know Nothings of Rockingham, assembled in 
council, recommended Mr. Letcher to the Order as a candidate 
for Governor. 

"A letter was then published by a Mr. Norment, declaring 
that Mr. Letcher did not belong to the Order. This called forth 
a letter from Mr. Letcher, admitting that he was not a member of 

I 



27 

the Order, but containing no disapproval whatever of its organi- 
zation or its doctrines. 

"Give us the speech and the two letters. Mr. Letcher's 
friends certainly desire that his complete record shall be placed 
before the Convention." 

Again, on the 30th, it says: 

"The Address of Dr. Ruffner.— We publish to-day the 
address of Dr. Ruffner, about which so much has been said, but 
about which very little is known by the Democracy. The en- 
dorsement and approval of this address by Mr. Letcher has been 
the chief cause of our objection to him. And now, to let the 
party act upon the same evidence that we have acted upon, we 
reproduce the anti-slavery address. 

"We believe that Mr. Letcher's approval of this address, and 
his soliciting its publication, constitute serious objections to, and 
with this opinion we have opposed, his nomination. Should 
the Democracy judge otherwise, and nominate Mr Letcher, all 
the consequences that may follow that nomination will be upon 
other heads than ours. We have opposed the policy of his 
nomination, we have freely and fairly canvassed his record, we 
have acted from a firm conviction of the duty we owe the party, 
to warn it against a nomination that we believe would result 
most disastrously for the party, in its relations to both State and 
Federal politics. 

"We feel satisfied that a perusal of this address will convince 
any impartial Democrat that Mr. Letcher's nomination would be 
impolitic and unwise; and as there are many other Democrats 
from whom a selection may be made, that they will readily see 
the wisdom of our course and nominate some other man. To 
select any man with anti-slavery sentiments staining his record, 
in preference to Henry A. Edmundson, the friend and supporter 
of Brooks, will, indeed, be misunderstood North, South, East 
and West. And, when the fact becomes known, that this 
Democrat, with an anti-slavery record, has no greater qualifica- 
tions than any of his competitors, it will be difficult to convince 
the world that he was not selected because of his anti-slavery 
sentiments. In Monday's paper we shall publish Mr. Letcher's 
letter to Mr. Pryor, and Dr. Ruffner's reply to that letter, and 
thus leave to the Convention the settlement of the contest." 

Again, the Richmond Enquirer, of November 30th, says: 

"While Mr. Letcher pretended to support the claims of Mr. 
Leake for the nomination, he was himself an eager aspirant for 
the same nomination. We defy Mr. Letcher to deny this. We 
are also informed that Mr. Letcher, after the nomination was 
made at Staunton, wrote to a member of the Democratic party, 



28 

urging him to come nut as an independent candidate in opposi- 
tion to the regular nominee. We call upon Mr. Letcher to pro- 
nounce as to the truth or falsehood of this charge. 

"Nor are these the only evidences that Mr. Letcher's alleged 
reason for opposition to Governor Wise was a pure deceit. Mr. 
Letcher contradicted himself repeatedly during the time which 
elapsed between the Democratic nomination and the election — 
at one time alleging a willingness to support the nominee — at 
another expressing uncertainty, as to whether he would — if'not 
absolute unwillingness to do so. This Mr. Letcher cannot 
deny." 

Such is the spirit and style in which the Richmond Enquirer, 
a paper which has long and faithfully been in the service and 
interest of the Democratic party, felt constrained to protest 
against the nomination of John JLetcJier. Notwithstanding all 
this, however, an excited and inconsiderate majority, in spite of 
the earnest and indignant remonstrance of not only a respectable, 
but a very large minority of the Petersburg Convention, presented 
John Letcher as a candidate for the first office within the gift of 
the people of Virginia. 

While the Richmond Enquirer has acquiesced in this nomi- 
nation, knowing the charges it preferred against Mr. Letcher 
to have been based upon indisputable evidence, those charges- 
yet remain unrecanted by that paper, as will be seen by the fol- 
lowing language, which appeared in its editorial columns, on 
the 7th of February last, after the action of the Petersburg Con- 
vention: 

11 Suffice it to say, so far as the whole tenor and spirit of our 
opposition to the nomination of Mr. Letcher is concerned we 
have no recantation to make — no qualification to add." 

And, at a still later date, (March the 8th, 1859,) and in yet more 
emphatic terms, the Enquirer said: 

u Those opinions advanced against the nomination of John 
Letcher, having been honestly and conscientiously entertained, 
have never been recanted by us and nerer irill be." 

The limits of this pamphlet might be almost indefinitely ex- 
tended with other extracts, showing the past opinions and career 
of John Letcher. 

But surely these must be enough! They prove his hostility 



29 

to the institution of slavery to be altogether intemperate and 
unmitigated. 

They prove that he regarded its existence as at tvar with the 
agricultural, commercial and manufacturing interests of Vir- 
ginia . 

That wherever, it existed, there vice, ignorance, poverty and 
crime most prevailed. 

That not only of these, was it the nursery, but that it was the 
manufacturer of Penitentiary convicts. 

That it was not only an evil, but a curse which West Virginia 
should not long tolerate, and which he would take steps at once 
to abolish . 

And that to this end, he would sever his native State in twain, 
and make of her tiro independent and hostile sovereignties. 

In atonement for all this, the most that he can do is to point 
to some scattering speeches, lately made in Congress, when he 
represented a slave-holding and si arc- sustaining constituency — 
when Congress was divided into a slave and an anti-slave, party 
and when the force of circumstances thus determined Ids position. 

Though for many years a prominent and a public man, Vir- 
ginian born and bred, he asks the charity of oblivion for nearly 
the whole of his life — not for political transgressions of any ordi- 
nary character, but for heresies which it is unpardonable for any 
Virginian to entertain. 

That Virginia should be one and inseparable, now and forever, 
is, or ought to be, a sentiment, not olily common, but dear to 
all her citizens, without regard to party or section. 

It rises above all party dictation — party discipline cannot influ- 
ence it, nor party tactics control it; and, therefore, the people of 
all parties should rise up and as one man repudiate the claims 
to the suffrages of Virginians of the man whose career has been 
disclosed by the foregoing authenticated facts. 



PRINTED BY ORDER 



OF THE 




Mi 




*, ~ 







^ 






** v % J - 




<* 












u **: 













V .♦. 












^, o 



















*a * 

















>. *•«'• ,* 







